In the first case, 4NT isn’t ordinarily quantitative in that situation but Blackwood. It would be quantitative if you’d bid it immediately after partner’s 2NT. And IMO it would be a very foolish bid indeed with a void in your hand and no guarantee of any heart honours in partner’s hand. Partner could have SKQx Hxxx DKJx CKxxx and raise you to 6NT and the opponent with HAKQJxxx is going to pass and now be on lead and take you well down. But you shouldn’t be making a quantitative bid in the first place: partner passed originally so doesn’t have opening points. With 12 HCP, partner would have opened 1NT. But partner is also in the wrong: with that hand, he should responded 3C over a natural 1C, not 2N, showing 4 card support, 10-12 points, and denying 4 cards in any other suit. You can then splinter / Exclusion RKCB to 4H and proceed from there. To me, 6C looks more robust than 6S.
But perhaps there’s a better way? You have a massive hand, so could open 2C. There’s a convention called the Devalued 2 Clubs, which is essentially a strong 2 in clubs. You open 2C and repeat the club suit. In this case you open 2C, partner responds 3C and you’re away.
In the second case, partner should definitely be shot because your 2H overcall is unlimited. I don’t like doubling because it’s denying a 5 card suit and your partner is going to respond in clubs. I also don’t like a direct raise by partner to 3H as that could be made on zero points and he’s better than that. I’d like to see 2H-3C-3N-4H (3C being forcing, and you’re allowed to bid NT if your singleton is an honour in partner’s suit). With a weak hand your rebid would be 3H, not 3N, which partner would leave.
Thanks for your response! I’ve added numbers to your post to make it easier to comment.
(1) I am rather averse to Blackwood, and would definitely think this quantitative. I’ll be interested in other Dopers’ opinions on this.
(2) I did feel very foolish bidding NT with a void. I considered 4C, 4D, 4S, (or even 5H if that shows a void!) but finally decided 4NT would be best to avoid confusion.
However, I think partner MUST have a heart stopper! He has rebid NT after I expressed disinterest in NT — he MUST have the two red suits stopped.
(3) Partner did NOT pass. (“Vul against not in 2nd seat I hold”)
(4) We play SAYC 15-17. (Though partner sometimes forgets and thinks 16-18 — I put up with him because he defends and plays the dummy with superb expertise.)
(5) We play Inverted Minors, so Two Clubs would be the alternative. I’m curious which is preferable, but with stoppers in all suits, 2 NT seems most descriptive and straightforward.
(6) I make strong forces only with the absolute nuts! * I would jump-shift to 2S over 1D; would probably bid just 1S over 1H.
(7) Double does NOT deny five hearts; and two hearts is limited by my failure to Double.
(8) But yes, the probability that partner will respond in clubs, and perhaps even rebid clubs, makes Double less attractive.
(9) Perhaps my overcalls tend to be lighter than yours. I consider 3H to be clearcut. My distant 2nd choice would be Pass, I guess. ( - Partner’s defense for his Pass — which shows he’s thoughtful — is that he expected too many minor-suit losers; he didn’t know I had 4 spades.)
In my first bridge life, 40 - 30 years ago, I used to open 1C. It was quite common then. Now I open 1S, which is now the normal action. Bidding has become so competitive that if you hold the boss suit, get it out there before opponents take away your opportunity. Consider 1C - (2H) - P - (4H) - ? You have not had a chance to mention spades, but you might have an 8-card fit. Or you might not.
I think he has a valid point about not showing another suit on this auction. I don’t think he can have the example you give because that is too strong to bid 2NT (unless you play it as forcing, which is not standard SAYC).
Your partner should certainly raise you. King fourth support, an ace and a ruffing value is a great hand. I disagree that you have enough to double first. I would want 17+ points and a better suit. When the bidding comes back to you, it might be quite high and introducing that suit could be very risky. Consider 1S - X - 3S - P - P to you. Are you going to bid 4H now? If you don’t want to bid 2H, I quite like 1NT. At least it shows your point count, and you have a stop in every suit.
A raise of 3NT to 4NT is quantitative in any system I have played (Acol, SAYC, 2 over 1). I take it further and play that 4NT is only RKCB if we have agreed a suit first.
I agree he must have a heart stop on this auction. In fact, he should have one for the 2NT bid. He has either 4 diamonds or 4 clubs. With no heart stop he should bid 1D or 2C (as you play inverted raises), respectively.
I agree. Inverted minor continuations are designed for hands with some suits stopped, but not all.
My second choice would be 2S! I think partner’s hand is so good it may merit a cue of 2S to show a sound raise to 3H.
One nitpick:
According to an online ACBL SAYC System Booklet, 2NT on this auction is “13-15 (game forcing)” … although partner and I haven’t explicitly discussed it. But a similar 12-point hand can be constructed where 6 diamonds is the best contract. (In fact I think this can be done with partner 3-3-4-3 !) Don’t forget your own post two months ago where “Andrew Robson and David Gold … bid and made 7D on a 4-3 fit [when] diamonds were first bid naturally at the 7-level.”
Yes, I thought partner would have bid 1D with five; and yes, I figured his 5D bid just showed an Ace. But my 6D bid seemed harmless.
Interesting. The booklet also says that there is no forcing minor suit raise, i.e. no inverted minors. I wonder what partner is supposed to bid with that hand under SAYC. 3C would risk playing in a 4-3 fit when NT is the obvious place to play.
Not really a problem, but the sort of bidding sequence you don’t hear every day:
Second in hand, all vul, I picked up S AKQJTxxx H x D Kxx C x and was wondering whether to open 1S or 4S when the bidding was opened in front of me with 3C. I bid 4S straight off, and LHO pulls out 5H without missing a beat.
I’d have bid 5S if partner hadn’t done it for me and opponents showed good judgement in doubling rather than shooting for a slam. 5S one down was still a cheap save against a stone-cold 5H.
K364 - Well, yes, but it’s only 8 tricks and it’s not at all clear who’s sacrificing.
So what do you do after 3C - 4S - 5H - 5S - 6H? Bid 6S with (at least) two Aces to lose off the top, or gamble they’ve got too high?
Which leads to a defense question. Partner leads the obvious Spade against 6H and dummy goes down with: S x H xxx D Jx C AKJTxxx
Declarer follows suit on your SA. What do you do next?
Partner would have led her Diamond Ace if she had it so declarer must have it. The bidding suggests that declarer’s Spade is singleton so you need to guess from the lead if partner (and thus declarer) has a doubleton. The bidding also suggests a lack of a fit in Clubs. If declarer has a singleton Spade and a singleton Club then you can cut her off from those tricks in dummy by playing a club now.
Partner does not have AD because earlier you said 5H was cold :). If declarer has a singleton or doubleton club, say xx AKQJxxx AQ(x) x(x), he can draw trumps in two rounds, ruff out the clubs, and dummy’s third heart will be an entry either via a spade ruff or by being able to overtake the third round of hearts. I return a spade to force dummy to ruff and kill the entry back to clubs. This could be a ruff and discard, but that might not be fatal, e.g. declarer is 1741 or 1732. As long as he cannot get back to dummy, he still has a diamond loser. This needs partner’s highest heart to be bigger than dummy’s highest, assuming partner has at least 2.
The trouble with that analysis is that partner could easily have 3 Hearts so declarer will not get any trump entries. Declarer could be S x H AKQJxx D AQTxx C Q.
We can each provide hands on which different defences will work (and even finding out what worked at the table would not tell us what is best overall). It is a question of which works in the most cases.
On the 1651 distribution you give, my defence only fails when the singleton is the queen. On all others, 80% of the singletons, my defence still works. Ignoring cases where nothing works, playing a club at trick two will work when declarer has a singleton club. Playing a spade will work when declarer has a singleton (that is not the queen) or doubleton club and needs the third heart as an entry. I think the latter case is more likely, but don’t have the brainpower to calculate it. Knowing the xxx in dummy would help a little. If 9xx, that supports you a bit more; if 432, it supports my line more.
It’s embarrassing to post deals like this and then realise after looking at it for several days that you’ve mis-analyzed the hand.
My analysis was the same as Quartz’s - if declarer has two Clubs, even without CQ then there’s no chance because he can always set the suit up with a simple finesse. So you play for him to have a singleton and return a Club at trick 2, killing the entry to the Clubs.
*But it’s not good enough - * Declarer wins in dummy and plays back a low Club. You can ruff if you want to, but declarer overruffs, draws trumps and gets back to dummy with a trump to run the Clubs.
(At the table, “declarer” had S x H AKQxxxx D ATxx C x and partner S xxx H Jx D Qxxx C Qxxx. Dummy’s trumps were something like 743 - high enough for a 3rd-round entry)
amarone - the problem with your analysis is that if declarer has a singleton Spade he doesn’t have to take the ruff in dummy - he can ruff in hand, set up the Clubs and get back to them with dummy’s preserved third trump. (In fact, as the cards lie, he can ruff in hand, throwing one of dummy’s Diamonds, then DA and a Diamond ruff, buck to HA, ruff a second Diamond and throw the last Diamond on CK without setting up Clubs at all.)
So it looks like 6H was making after all and opponents were very generous to let us play it in 5S. But amarone’s defence at least puts declarer to a guess in Clubs if he’s something like 2731 or 2722, so it’s got more hope than mine and Quartz’s.
((Incidentally, in the example hand Quartz gave, 6H is cold against any defence, since declarer can run DJ and pick up the whole suit. In fact, I think you need to rely on partner for DQ in any distribution, since otherwise declarer can finesse the DK and ruff a third Diamond in dummy.)
Played a cup game last night against a national-level side in the UK and, unsurprisingly, got absolutely annihilated. Nearly 100 down after 24 boards (out of 32) so called it a day.
Don’t mind the walloping so much as the way we played - psychologically was really tough to concentrate on playing solid bridge when the opps are a couple of levels above, make very few mistakes, AND have all the cards their way. Type of game where you really need a gritty temperament, which wasn’t much in evidence on our team I have to say.
Busy Scissors, I fell your pain. Staying grounded and maintaining your standard of play when the Gods are against you and even limiting the damage seems hopeless is one of the toughest asks in any game/sport (and something that I, personally, am very bad at).
All I have to offer is a bidding problem:
First in hand, no-one vulnerable, you pick up S A9xx H x D J9xxxxxx C -
What do you do?
If you pass (partner might have Spades), the bidding goes 1C - 1H - 1S back to you. Now what?
I do pass initially. When it comes back to me I hope I am playing Snapdragon doubles in which a double shows the 4th suit, i.e. diamonds, and tolerance for partner’s suit. Then, when I bid 2D, it shows diamonds without tolerance for partner’s suit.
I passed initially, then bid 2D over 1C - 1H -1S. For the next round of bidding, everyone repeated themselves louder: 3C - 3H - 3S.
At this point, I ought to have applied the old rule “When in a total misfit, pass now!” - or even doubled 3S and hoped opponents had a misfit too and partner had enough to beat 4C. But it’s an 8-card suit with minimal defence against Clubs, so I pushed on to 4D, partly hoping to end up defending 4S.
Partner pulled to 4H on S Kx H AQJTxxx D - C Jxxxx, was inevitably doubled and did well to get out for one down. Of course with KH onside 3S is 3 off on the defensive cross-ruff and 4C is harder to analyse but is probably 2 off on normal play.
Of course, if I’d known that RHO had cheerfully bid his 3S on S QJTxx H xx D KQTx C xx, I’d probably have been keener to double him.
